So it's difficult to provide and document a configuration file like this? --- # Put your ntp nameservers here # Example: # nameserver ntp.busybox.net nameserver ntp.example.com nameserver ntp2.example.com ---
I can see that we'll be using the full version of ntpd on our distro. You've fully convinced me that it's the most wise choice to make. Thank you, Mike Dean [email protected] http://www.emacinc.com/ Engineer EMAC, Inc. 618-529-4525 Ext. 330 618-457-0110 Fax 2390 EMAC Way Carbondale, Il 62901 On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Michael Conrad <[email protected]>wrote: > On 3/18/2014 3:54 PM, Mike Dean wrote: > >> So you're telling me that a plain text script which takes more than 300 >> bytes is a better solution than an option that could be configured out? >> But your full text option, enabled by default, takes less than 300 bytes I >> suppose? >> > > I'm not sure I follow. Harald suggested adding 23 bytes to your existing > script, and adds the convenience of a config file where there wasn't before. > > You could add that same minimal config file in C, and it would take a lot > more than 23 bytes. > > Either way, the "config file" will be a thing specific to busybox ntpd and > you will have the exact same documentation problem in teaching people how > to use it, then they have learning about the "-p" command line switch. > > If you want to be compatible with a standard tool, and support "ntp.conf", > then you gain the popularly-available documentation, but add a significant > amount of code. > > Neither way is really ideal. So if you want to add a non-ideal solution, > it should be done in a distro-specific script. > > -Mike >
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
